"Thinking Out Loud"

Aidsand has been “Thinking Out Loud” and it’s been shared with the denomination at large. I’ve been thinking about his thinking.

To sum up my feelings on his expressed thoughts, I can say that looking at the whole of his thoughts, I don’t really see anything different than what ABCUSA has or is now. He has used some “Shared Table” language but his picture of the “Shared Table” is not the picture those of us who read the Lancaster Proposal have envisioned, and that original Lancaster pic was not what Bible evangelicals, at least this one, were looking for in the first place.

In his critique of the SCODS overlay indicating that “Baptists don’t respond well to command and control,” he lays the groundwork for the weakness of his own ideas re: “By-laws guaranteeing perpetual relationship with the larger denominational ABC family,” and the “Board of General Ministries” nominating national leadership, and “some form of annual proportional assessment on covenanting ministry partners.” Baptists don’t respond well to command and control structures, especially those that are more Presbyterian, Episcopal, etc. than baptistic.

His thinking does not lay the biblical foundation that the average ABC church is seeking, a foundation, which takes seriously the authoritative role played by scripture upon Baptist theology and practice. His position appears to extend the kinda “do what you want under the rubric of soul freedom without any fear that the denomination will expect you to be in observance of and obedience to the teaching of the Bible” situation that currently defines ABC connection.

In fact, the references to theology in this paper “theological diversity,” “theological moderates and progressives,” clearly indicate that theologies that do not base their understanding of God’s revelation in the actual words of the book are not only more than welcome, but sought after. Just like today.

Actually, as I envision what is here being thought, I see the same old ABCUSA with a few label changes for boards and regional and/or other staff positions. The average ABCUSA church that can stomach remaining with the denomination as it is today will notice little or no difference (except the nomenclature changes, and maybe the assessment) after this set up takes affect.

Now, please, I understand that Aidsand is just thinking out loud, bouncing things off others, brainstorming, but since he is on the committee to rewrite what ABC structure should be, it is evident that his thinking will be pivotal in what evolves out of the mix, so it is fair game for pre-mortem evaluation.

If We (Evangelicals) Stay

There are still many evangelicals who don’t want to withdraw from ABC. They still believe that there is a possibility for reformation. I don’t think so because for decades evangelicals have been (and I think still are) unwilling to do the things necessary to bring about reform, and without such willingness and follow through the options are only two: 1. Go 2. Stay.

If true reformation, renewal, or revival is to come to ABC, evangelicals need to be willing not only to post their 95 thesis on the internet, but be willing to act in concert in ways that will be excoriated by our liberal brothers and friends in places of power within the current structure.

The current denominational by-laws and rules are designed to keep evangelicals from gaining a majority in positions that can vote to bring change, while insuring that a liberal majority is almost always in ascendancy (since way back in 1968 I’ve been voting against the changes in denominational structure that have allowed this situation to occur).

With the design and layout of ABCUSA structures favoring the control of liberal leadership and blocking the resurgence of a majority evangelicalism at decision making levels, baptist evangelicals who have anything other than fantasy hopes for a return to biblical authority, need to take a new course.

If reformation is possible, it can come if (and it is a big “if”) evangelicals are willing to become “inside outsiders.” ABC evangelicals need to put their ministries and monies outside of denomination structures. For example: Evangelicals ought to form an independent version of BNM. Call it “Alternative North American Ministries in the churches of the ABC,” or some such nom de plume indicating it’s connected to the autonomous churches, but not with the denomination. Through it, commission evangelical missionaries under the direction of evangelical churches. Raise their mission support from the evangelical churches, and expend it outside of ABCUSA checkbooks. Over time it will grow to be the dominant national ministry group connected to ABC local churches.

Evangelicals should form a national Evangelical Pastors Council as an alternative to the Ministers’ Council that exists at this time. This new council would be open to evangelical pastors (youth workers and other ministry personnel) who are willing to sign, preach, and live by a biblical statement of faith. This would provide evangelical pastors (and through them their churches) a continuous voice to raise evangelical concerns to current denomination leadership representing the many evangelical pastors (“All for one, one for all.”), and help allieviate the leaning some churches have towards leaving the denomination.

Evangelicals, if they remain in ABC, need to keep the mission monies flowing, but not through United Mission. All giving that any evangelical churches do should be targeted and “specified” (SPC line on “Monthly Report Of Missions Support” form) to evangelical missionaries, ministries, and good works, that will carry on the good ABC Missions has done in the past, but in the exclusive context of a biblical message of salvation through Christ, and reform for individuals and society. Evangelicals need to be willing to begin a new unit, region, association, or committee whenever they find that an ABCUSA configuration does not represent evangelical thought and positions, and in the event there is intransigence to change in the national leadership’s approach to biblical ministry these alternatives could form the basis of an entirely new body of Baptist churches.

Selling the "Holy Donut"

Sell the "Holy Donut?" OK with me, but don’t use the money to endow OGS.

It is clear that ABCUSA is divided over biblical issues, is there any one in our denomination who doesn’t realize this? So when we sell the HQ at VF don’t use the money to endow the point of view of OGS. Divide the money too. Set up two endowments; one to support conservative evangelistic ministries, and one for the social gospel ministries of the left. This will extend the long time cooperation of conservatives and liberals within the ABC organizations without showing favoritism by endowing and perpetuating one view over the other. To endow the OGS is simply to continue the Welcoming & Affirming approach that the OGS has more than tacitly endorsed and is unfair to the conservative churches of the denomination. Sell it! Good move, but don’t use the money to endow OGS.

Without Benefit of Clergy?

In my opinion, and I’m sure there are some who wish I had fewer opinions, the problems of the denomination on all levels from national to local will only be solved when the leadership takes a stand. They must affirm the teaching of the Word re: homosexuality and all the social ills scripture addresses, or affirm the choices of the world outside the church. They must do this come what may.

Either decision will result in a smaller national body as ABC will lose some churches no matter which way leadership leads. It may result in a lot less money depending on which churches remain. It will certainly change the view the media and certain segments of society have toward us, but it will “make an honest woman” of ABCUSA (so to speak), and of each of our autonomous churches. Then the local churches will finally understand the direction of the denomination and will be able to decide to stay or go without twinges of conscience over issues of history, tradition, or loyalty.